Barr: Mueller examined 10 instances of possible obstruction by Trump

Attorney General William Barr revealed Thursday that special counsel Robert Mueller examined 10 instances involving actions by President Trump that may have constituted obstruction of justice.

“The report recounts 10 episodes involving the president and discusses potential legal theories for connecting these actions to elements of an obstruction offense,” Barr said during a news conference.

[WATCH: Barr’s press conference on Mueller report release]

Last month, Mueller completed his nearly two-year-long investigation into whether members of the Trump campaign colluded with Russia and whether the president obstructed justice. Since then, the attorney general has been working with Mueller to redact four categories of information, and Mueller’s report will be released to the public Thursday after it is sent to congressional leaders.

Mueller did not make a determination about whether Trump obstructed justice with his actions across the span of the probe, but instead laid out the evidence on both sides, Barr told lawmakers in a letter last month summarizing Mueller’s principal conclusions. The special counsel did, however, state that while his report “does not conclude that the president committed a crime, it also does not exonerate him,” Barr wrote in his letter.

Instead, it was Barr and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein who concluded that there was not enough evidence to establish whether Trump obstructed justice.

Barr’s letter prompted the president to declare victory and proclaim “complete and total exoneration.

The attorney general said Thursday that he and Rosenstein disagreed with some of Mueller’s legal theories regarding possible obstruction of justice and “felt that some of the episodes examined did not amount to obstruction as a matter of law.”

Instead, Barr told reporters the Justice Department accepted Mueller’s legal framework for their analysis of whether the president obstructed justice and evaluated the evidence from federal investigators before drawing their own conclusions on the question of obstruction.

“In assessing the president’s actions discussed in the report, it is important to bear in mind the context,” Barr said. “President Trump faced an unprecedented situation. As he entered into office, and sought to perform his responsibilities as president, federal agents and prosecutors were scrutinizing his conduct before and after taking office, and the conduct of some of his associates. At the same time, there was relentless speculation in the news media about the president’s personal culpability.”

“Yet, as he said from the beginning, there was in fact no collusion,” Barr added. “And as the special counsel’s report acknowledges, there is substantial evidence to show that the president was frustrated and angered by a sincere belief that the investigation was undermining his presidency, propelled by his political opponents, and fueled by illegal leaks.”

Mueller’s investigation spanned nearly two years and resulted in criminal charges filed against 34 individuals and three companies. Among those indicted were a number of people close to Trump, including his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, former national security adviser Michael Flynn, and longtime lawyer Michael Cohen.

Barr praised the White House for cooperating fully with Mueller’s probe and said the special counsel and his team of prosecutors had “unfettered access” to documents from the White House and Trump campaign.

The president, however, did not sit for an interview with Mueller and instead provided written answers to questions.

The White House Counsel’s Office, as well as Trump’s personal attorneys, have reviewed a redacted version of the report prior to its public release. Following the White House’s review, Trump decided not to invoke executive privilege to withhold additional information in Mueller’s report, and Barr said Trump “took no act that in fact deprived the special counsel of the documents and witnesses necessary to complete his investigation.”

“Apart from whether the acts were obstructive, this evidence of noncorrupt motives weighs heavily against any allegation that the President had a corrupt intent to obstruct the investigation,” Barr said.

Related Content